I was fortunate to capture these photographs on my way to South Colony Lakes on Friday night. The sun setting behind the Sangre di Cristo Range was breathtaking. This was my attempt at capturing the beauty.

I spent a while shooting Longs from near the Iron Gates on Sunday morning and thought I'd post a sequence of photos showing the progression of light. Sunrise on 9/9 was at 6:39. I kept the white balance the same for all photos.

5:41 20 sec @ f4 iso 1600

Longs-3183.jpg (104.01 KiB) Viewed 271 times

6:18 5 sec @ f4 iso 100

Longs-3193.jpg (166.18 KiB) Viewed 271 times

6:33 .8 sec @f8 iso 100

Longs-3197.jpg (135.92 KiB) Viewed 271 times

"To play a wrong note is insignificant; to play without passion is inexcusable." -Ludwig van Beethoven

How much editing (beyond cropping or rotating) are you guys doing to these? The saturation, balance, vignetting, etc all seems off the hook in some cases. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for making the best image possible. Just like I believe in multitake/multitrack recording of music. But I'm just curious how much processing is done on the computer to achieve some of these awesome shots.

Thanks for posting that progression Cameron. I think I like the overall exposure at 6:18, soft shadows, great deep blues in the sky but I like the alpenglow at 6:39 too. The shadow cast running mid shot from the left almost makes the bottom half of the photo look black and white... crazy!

Question though, what do you do in those situations where the alpenglow is casting crazy dark shadows? Not totally black but dark enough to loose the detail in the shadows and therefore the depth of those areas? Example, your shot at 6:45? Lastly, which of these shots is your favorite and why? Or are you working on one that you didn't show that will blow all the others away?

- Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls.

rking007 wrote:Thanks for posting that progression Cameron. I think I like the overall exposure at 6:18, soft shadows, great deep blues in the sky but I like the alpenglow at 6:39 too. The shadow cast running mid shot from the left almost makes the bottom half of the photo look black and white... crazy!

Question though, what do you do in those situations where the alpenglow is casting crazy dark shadows? Not totally black but dark enough to loose the detail in the shadows and therefore the depth of those areas? Example, your shot at 6:45? Lastly, which of these shots is your favorite and why? Or are you working on one that you didn't show that will blow all the others away?

Hope you don't mind if I jump in here. Getting technical; here's a good description of Alpenglow, as we know it and refer to it regarding mountain photography.

Alpenglow (from German: Alpenglühen) is an optical phenomenon. When the Sun is just below the horizon, a horizontal red glowing band can sometimes be observed on the opposite horizon. Alpenglow is easiest to observe when mountains are illuminated but can also be observed when the sky is illuminated through backscattering.

Since the Sun is below the horizon, there is no direct path for the light to reach the mountain. Instead, light reflects off airborne snow, water, or ice particles low in the atmosphere. It is this circumstance that separates a normal sunrise or sunset from alpenglow.

So what's my point? Alpenglow by the above definition is some super sweet light that a cameras sensor just eats up (on a tripod... of course). Don't blink, because this light usually lasts for maybe 3-4 minutes in the morning and 5-10 minutes at night. The light is so soft that pretty much any sensor on any camera can pick up the dynamic range. We're talking about a super even flow of light throughout your frame that renders shadows and highlights evenly. The end product is mostly incredibly pleasing to look at. A really well done alpenglow shot usually takes the trophy over the rest. Thus is the reason you like Vonmacle's lovely image at 6:18. That's an alpenglow image!